Nigel Farage is a great excuse for David Cameron to ditch the TV debates

Bernard Jenkin is cautious about sharing the euphoria that seems to be gripping the Tories (Photo: PA)

Just when Dave thought the summer was going his way, Bernard Jenkin lasers in on two internal issues that will dog the Prime Minister between now and the election. Nigel Farage? A great excuse to ditch the TV debates in 2015. Coalition? Only if Tory MPs give David Cameron permission, and then only if he is free to do what’s necessary to eliminate the deficit. Tories are uneasy about giving the Ukip leader free publicity but fear Mr Cameron will be unable to resist media demands for four-way debates. And many of them hate the idea of a repeat coalition with the Lib Dems: they want to make it impossible for their leader to cut a deal without their permission.

When I interviewed Mr Jenkin for this blog he was cautious about sharing the euphoria that seems to be gripping some of his colleagues. Yes, things are looking up, but he fears over-confidence. The election is ‘wide open’. And not all is well. There is still a lot of unhappiness among members, he says, in particular at being stuck in coalition for five years when there have been plenty of opportunities to call an election and seek a majority. As one of those who voted against the fixed term parliaments Act, he believes Tories will rue the day they thought it was a good idea.

Growing disillusion with politics means all three main parties will in all likelihood get a smaller share of the vote in 2015 than they did in 2010, and on a lower turnout. And Ukip could change the outcome on seats by depriving Tories of vital votes in close fought constituencies. For some time now there have been rumours that Downing Street might like to ditch the debates, which caused a sensation in 2010 but hurt Mr Cameron. Mr Jenkin reckons Dave can use the Farage threat as an excuse to ditch them next time. He hates them anyway: “Personally it think they are a mistake. They turn general elections into a gladiatorial contest where leaders gabble at each other. They are unedifying, un-illuminating. They were obviously a mistake from Cameron’s point of view at the last election.”

Calling them off would be ‘a courageous thing to do’, he says, with a hint that he doesn’t expect Mr Cameron to show much courage. “It would be an act of leadership and I would recommend him to do it.” He adds: “I'm sure everyone in the media will be extremely disappointed if they don’t take place. If Nigel Farage is insisting on coming into those debates, that's the best excuse for not having them.”

In 2010 Mr Jenkin urged Mr Cameron to form a minority government and try his luck with a maintenance and supply arrangement. “He disregarded that advice and the consequence has been a relatively paralysed administration.” He says a Conservative majority is needed to do the hard work on the deficit that the Coalition – to his mind – has failed to do. Next time though, if a majority is not available, and Mr Cameron is denied a free hand by the Lib Dems, then he should seek to lead a minority government. “If we cannot secure an agreement with a coalition partner that gives us freedom to address the things that are holding the country back, including relations with the EU, if we can't deregulate, increase incentives and liberate the economy to grow faster, well, then we should be in opposition. Because we need a clear mandate or accept that we've lost the election.”

This time, however, the parliamentary party should be “properly consulted”. If it is “it will be much harder for the leadership to bounce us into an agreement like they did last time”. Last time MPs had no experience, and most of them were new anyway. “This time he will be dealing with coalition hardened veterans who are going to be much more wary.”

As chairman of the Public Administration Select Committee, Mr Jenkin has been a candid critic of the Government’s reform programme. It still lacks a strategic plan for the future of the Civil Service, he says. The Rolls Royce machine is – to his mind – a Victorian concept in need of an overhaul. He wants a parliamentary commission, something the Government has refused to allow.“Unless there's a proper think about the shape, nature and culture of our Civil Service, and ministers engage the leadership and the leadership itself engages with its workforce on the nature of change, well, all the evidence is that a divided and adversarial leadership will lead to a failed programme.”

He is sceptical about the proposal to allow ministers to appoint their own team of officials, because the thinks the problems run deeper. He worries that a culture of fear, where those held accountable are ‘taken out and shot’, means the machine is too frightened to learn. “In successful organisations accountability is an empowering thing, but it only works if you are going to get support for your success and your failures,” he says. He is also concerned about the tone of the debate that gives the impression “it is ministers against officials”. He concludes: “The adverse narrative is being generated to justify forcing through changes which we are told system is reluctant to accept.” It’s not just ministers who are getting it wrong: permanent secretaries “are also resisting” scrutiny. “The whole system is in denial of how much has changed.” At fault is a culture of blame that makes it difficult for individuals to learn from their mistakes. “A culture of fear is no way to lead an organisation particularly if you are trying to change it.”